The panentheism of Ibn Arabi expounded by Jami
The Bold text is Jami's explanation
[b]
" The Real Being is One alone, at once who is truly Existent and the Absolute, but He possesses different degrees. In the first degree He is unmanifested and unconditioned ,and exempt from all limitation or relation, In this aspect he cannot be described by epithets or attributes, and is too holy to be designated by spoken or written words , neither does tradition furnish an expression for His Majesty, nor has reason the power to demonstrate the depth of His perfection. The greatest philosophers are baffled by the impossibility of attaining to knowledge of Him . His first characteristic is the lack of all characteristics, and the last result of the attempt to know Him is stupefaction
The second degree is the self-display of very being in an epiphany containing in itself all the active, necessary and divine manifestations, as well as all the passive, contingent and mundane manifestations. This degree is named the * First Emanation " because it is the first of all the manifestations of the Very Being , and above it there is no other degree than that of the ' Unmanifested '
The third degree is named the 'Unity of the Whole Aggregate", which contains in itself all the active and efficient manifestations .It is also named the degree of "Divinity"
The fourth degree is the manifestation of detail , of the degree named Divinity , it is the degree of the names and the theatres wherein they are manifested .These two last named degrees refer to the outward aspect of Being wherein necessity is a universal condition
The fifth degree is the ' Unity of the Whole Aggregate,' which includes all the passive manifestations whose characteristic is the potentiality of receiving impressions, i.e passivity, It is the degree of mundane existence and contingency.
The sixth degree is the manifestation in detail of the preceding degree , it is the degree of the sensible world .These two last degrees refer to the exterior of the intelligible world wherein contingency is one of the invariable qualities
It consists of the revelation of the Divine Mind to himself under the forms of the substances of the contingent. Consequently, in reality there is but One Sole Being, who is interfused in all these degrees and hierarchies which are only the details of the Unity " Singleness" The Very Being in these degrees is identical with them, just as these degrees when they were in the Very Being , were identical therewith
[God was, and there was not anything with Him] " [/b]
This should give you some perspective
Ibn Arabi's panentheism gives a very interesting response to the theological problems concerning God, free will, theodicy , nature of hell , cause of disagreement in religious creed
As this universe is the manifestation of the attributes of God, it is all good beyond the framework of morality, in a transcendental sense. In every single moment (which escapes our comprehension) the universe is brought to the realm of psuedo existence from non-existence, but it has never tasted absolute existence which belongs to God only. God's mercy and love keeps the universe in a state of pseudo existence.
That's why evil has no existence in the realm of God's existence, it only attains meaning in relation to ourselves and the world. A similitude can clarify my position. If you murder someone in a dream, you have not done any evil in your wakeful state , ie the world where existence is considerably strong. Furthermore, it doesn't make sense to apply our moral understanding on God as we exist on a different plane.
As for free will, free will and determinism are two sides of the same coin. Some interpreters of Ibn Arabi make space for the freedom of intention (will) in an individual, but others leave no room for it. Ibn Arabi doesn't have a problem with denying our free will to make room for determinism, but in a very paradoxical manner. The sudden desire/intention that appears in our mind, even if in the absence of an apparent chain of cause effect, it's caused by God to appear before we can even apprehend it. However, the will of God is inextricably tied to the nature of every created being. Every person has a kernal which is the fountain of future actions, this is known to God in its totality, so God makes it manifest. Your free will is determined in precedence but it's YOUR free will that's being predetermined.
How could God judge people and send them to paradise/hell if free will is determinism ? For Ibn Arabi, hell isn't a bad place for those who are destined to reside in it. Contentment is achieved by inner harmony with the world out there. The inner nature of disbelievers will come to be comfortable with hell and the inner nature of believers will find comfort in paradise. Hell is obviously terrible for believers so it still retains it's scary imagery in the holy books.
As for the cause of disagreement between believers and disbelievers alike in creed/religion. God cannot be contained in a single creed. The cause of disagreement doesn't negate the existence of God, it only alludes to the incomprehensible nature of God. A true mystic affirms every single creed in its ontological intent. On the day of Resurrection, God will appear to every person in the way he was thought of. This will leave everyone bewildered. So never run away from bewilderment in your path to God
[b]
" The Real Being is One alone, at once who is truly Existent and the Absolute, but He possesses different degrees. In the first degree He is unmanifested and unconditioned ,and exempt from all limitation or relation, In this aspect he cannot be described by epithets or attributes, and is too holy to be designated by spoken or written words , neither does tradition furnish an expression for His Majesty, nor has reason the power to demonstrate the depth of His perfection. The greatest philosophers are baffled by the impossibility of attaining to knowledge of Him . His first characteristic is the lack of all characteristics, and the last result of the attempt to know Him is stupefaction
The second degree is the self-display of very being in an epiphany containing in itself all the active, necessary and divine manifestations, as well as all the passive, contingent and mundane manifestations. This degree is named the * First Emanation " because it is the first of all the manifestations of the Very Being , and above it there is no other degree than that of the ' Unmanifested '
The third degree is named the 'Unity of the Whole Aggregate", which contains in itself all the active and efficient manifestations .It is also named the degree of "Divinity"
The fourth degree is the manifestation of detail , of the degree named Divinity , it is the degree of the names and the theatres wherein they are manifested .These two last named degrees refer to the outward aspect of Being wherein necessity is a universal condition
The fifth degree is the ' Unity of the Whole Aggregate,' which includes all the passive manifestations whose characteristic is the potentiality of receiving impressions, i.e passivity, It is the degree of mundane existence and contingency.
The sixth degree is the manifestation in detail of the preceding degree , it is the degree of the sensible world .These two last degrees refer to the exterior of the intelligible world wherein contingency is one of the invariable qualities
It consists of the revelation of the Divine Mind to himself under the forms of the substances of the contingent. Consequently, in reality there is but One Sole Being, who is interfused in all these degrees and hierarchies which are only the details of the Unity " Singleness" The Very Being in these degrees is identical with them, just as these degrees when they were in the Very Being , were identical therewith
[God was, and there was not anything with Him] " [/b]
This should give you some perspective
Ibn Arabi's panentheism gives a very interesting response to the theological problems concerning God, free will, theodicy , nature of hell , cause of disagreement in religious creed
As this universe is the manifestation of the attributes of God, it is all good beyond the framework of morality, in a transcendental sense. In every single moment (which escapes our comprehension) the universe is brought to the realm of psuedo existence from non-existence, but it has never tasted absolute existence which belongs to God only. God's mercy and love keeps the universe in a state of pseudo existence.
That's why evil has no existence in the realm of God's existence, it only attains meaning in relation to ourselves and the world. A similitude can clarify my position. If you murder someone in a dream, you have not done any evil in your wakeful state , ie the world where existence is considerably strong. Furthermore, it doesn't make sense to apply our moral understanding on God as we exist on a different plane.
As for free will, free will and determinism are two sides of the same coin. Some interpreters of Ibn Arabi make space for the freedom of intention (will) in an individual, but others leave no room for it. Ibn Arabi doesn't have a problem with denying our free will to make room for determinism, but in a very paradoxical manner. The sudden desire/intention that appears in our mind, even if in the absence of an apparent chain of cause effect, it's caused by God to appear before we can even apprehend it. However, the will of God is inextricably tied to the nature of every created being. Every person has a kernal which is the fountain of future actions, this is known to God in its totality, so God makes it manifest. Your free will is determined in precedence but it's YOUR free will that's being predetermined.
How could God judge people and send them to paradise/hell if free will is determinism ? For Ibn Arabi, hell isn't a bad place for those who are destined to reside in it. Contentment is achieved by inner harmony with the world out there. The inner nature of disbelievers will come to be comfortable with hell and the inner nature of believers will find comfort in paradise. Hell is obviously terrible for believers so it still retains it's scary imagery in the holy books.
As for the cause of disagreement between believers and disbelievers alike in creed/religion. God cannot be contained in a single creed. The cause of disagreement doesn't negate the existence of God, it only alludes to the incomprehensible nature of God. A true mystic affirms every single creed in its ontological intent. On the day of Resurrection, God will appear to every person in the way he was thought of. This will leave everyone bewildered. So never run away from bewilderment in your path to God
Comments (40)
The first emanation of the eternal gods in eternal heaven appear in the First Grand Epihany in the dream or conscious mind, through which the message is sent of the reasons of the collective divine creation along with an epiphany on the basic structure of the fundamental nature of the divine matter used. Consider this as a sign of gratitude that the gods could use your dream or mind to receive the divine message. The epiphany of the nature of the basic material of the universe is a scientific landmark which in the whole history of science hasn't been experienced before. Einstein longed for it, like every true physicist should: "The contemplation of this world, beckons, like a liberation". And, fully according to the guidelines of the idol image of Einstein, the epihany experienced can be explained to a six year old. Eternal gratitude to the gods, who made me see the wonder of the structure of the fundamentals of the physical world. Wow, what a trip!
According to this proposition... The war, inflation, COVID pandemic, unemployment, and other serious issues are upon to God's mercy... Or what?
Excuse sir, but what the f*ck is going on with your thoughts? :down:
I haven't experienced anything like that but l have come close to experiencing annihilation in the remembrance of God. I am only quoting the statements of Jami, who surely experienced the theophany of unity in multiplicity, but he was a monotheist. That's why panentheism is necessary to reconcile the multiplicity of the universe and its diversity with the oneness of God.
Must have been a scary feeling. Being absorbed by the whole? Or was the feeling a great one?
Yes, it's all beautiful from the perspective of God. I have lived with anxiety and depression. My suffering is it's own cure. I am grateful to God, l won't exist without him. I am not brave enough to claim my love for him as that would invite more misfortune towards me but l wish l was capable of loving God
I think you need to expand your mind. You should consider the following question. Do ideas exist ? They surely don't exist in the same way we do. It's not weird to assign different categories/degrees to existence itself.
In the same way, the universe exists but in relation to God it doesn't have the same degree/type of existence. Just as your ideas exist but not in the same way you exist
and then, you also pointed out:
Two basic steps:
A) the universe itself doesn't need to be compared with that imaginary subterfuge called God because the universe exists and will exist doesn't matter if we live in earth or not.
B) you use contradictory arguments to pursue God's omnipotence, but do not worry, I do understand you can only achieve it through faith, not knowledge. What all you are writing is related to your own beliefs.
Be careful! Love is a serious mental disease - Plato.
It's a great experience, better than anything the world can offer. The remembrance/thought of God overtakes your mind. You forget yourself, the surrounding and everything apart from God in that moment.
However, it's only the first stage. The out of body experience is the next stage. It's more of a lucid dream where you detach yourself from the body and get to interact with spirits. Those who know, they know. Other people can entertain doubt
I like how you are so confident to assert naive-realism which is in fashion these days. I don't think it's easy to proof the existence of the universe or even yourself if you want to go down that path. You can take the Wittgensteinian route and deny the need to ground oneself with a metaphysical foundation but it will also let me take a different paradigm in which the universe doesn't exist compared to God.
Damn Plato. He should have wasted less time on philosophy and spent more time on love before condemning it and if love is a mental illness, it's a good one. In Arabic, a lover is called majnoon which literally denotes madness ( of a crazy lover )
That's the spirit!
Neither God's existence.
Damn believers. You waste so much time hating philosophy and knowledge
And ?
Once you know it's not possible to proof the existence of anyone ( yourself, the universe and God ) . You stop with the childish disputes of theism vs atheism. That's why l didn't attempt to proof the existence of God before describing panentheism. God's existence is a given and the content proceeds onwards without addressing atheists who are strangers to me.
I didn't like the remark of Plato on love but it's interesting to see how you miss the fact that, panentheism is rooted in neo-platonism and Plotinus was one of the first philosophers to describe it in detail. Ibn Arabi only beautified it, he made it more comprehensible and coherent as a whole
But l am the believer in opposition to philosophers , it seems to you. Have you ever thought that, the musicians, artists, poets also have something to teach you about life. They are not here to entertain you. Learn from them
Artists, poets, writers, and philophers have always been the brave citizens who expressed their emotions against a cosmological dictatorship you pretend to defend: God.
I highlight your own words: learn from all of those who develop critical thinking
It is not even worthy at all. There are more realistic aspects to focus in. The existence of myself or God is limited to a simplistic debate
You are conveniently ignoring the great number of believers amongst the artists, poets, writers and philosophers, who didn't protest against God but joined harmoniously with the universe to sing of his glory. Even Nietzsche recognized religion as the greatest form of art. Artistic thinking goes beyond "critical thinking" , which is a euphemism for a mind under the influence of scientism induced paralysis. You are no different from the ordinary plethora of people who have lost the sense of reverence for God in this era. But ofcourse, you are the critical thinker and l am the sheep
I don't see any dictator running the world. There's a merciful God responsible for the existence of this world and l can't even begin to fathom his perfection. You see the world with what's in you. Once you remove the dirt , the rancor around your heart, you will hear the entire universe sing the praise of God
Are you familiar with Taoism? Jami's explanation sounds a lot like the Tao Te Ching. The main difference I see is that the Tao is impersonal while God seems to be personified.
Indeed. How are your claims any different to those made by Catholics; Mormons; Scientologists; Hindus? Or anyone who makes pronouncements about the nature of reality.
Then one could be critical too about non-believers, who seek solace in science. I'm a physicist myself, and even a poet, writer, and artist. If there were no gods that had created the basic ingredients of the universe, to let it evolve into a temporal, but eternally repeating reflection of heaven and the eternal gods in it, all human activities would be devoid of reason and beauty. It would all be scientifically explainable, exactly as the sciences pretend to be able to. But they can't and even science itself, the investigation of the matter created by the gods, gets a load of wonder.
After reading the works of great philosophers ,eastern and western . I have come to the conclusion that independent reason without other worldly guidance isn't capable of reaching metaphysical, moral, aesthetic truths. Rationalism with a hint of empiricism bridged by Kant is only useful in mathematics and science (stem). This is not to say that l am a positivist, as they reject metaphysics. You can still call me an anti-philosopher as I am in agreement with Ghazali. However, it's useful to translate mystical experience back to philosophy, to make it more accessible.
You should read into the relatively new emerging sub branch of philosophy, the epistemology of disagreement. This is one of the most honest branch of philosophy and l hope we can see more anti-philosophers in the future, like Wittgenstein, Rorty even if they happen to disagree with each other
The passage in the OP is a classical statement of 'the perennial philosophy'.
[quote=Edward Conze, Buddhist Philosophy and its European Parallels] The "perennial philosophy" is ...defined as a doctrine which holds [1] that as far as worthwhile knowledge is concerned not all men are equal, but that there is a hierarchy of persons, some of whom, through what they are, can know much more than others; [2] that there is a hierarchy also of the levels of reality, some of which are more "real," because more exalted than others; and [3] that the wise men of old have found a "wisdom" which is true, although it has no "empirical" basis in observations which can be made by everyone and everybody; and that in fact there is a rare and unordinary faculty in some of us by which we can attain direct contact with actual reality--through the Prajñ?p?ramit? of the Buddhists, the logos of Parmenides, the sophia of Aristotle and others, Spinoza's amor dei intellectualis, Hegel's Vernunft, and so on; and [4] that true teaching is based on an authority which legitimizes itself by the exemplary life and charismatic quality of its exponents.[/quote]
However, it's also true that this insight is essentially incompatible with modernity, which is grounded in the assumption that there is no 'vertical dimension' corresponding to the realm of quality, which the OP refers to, and which is the subject of the OP also. That is why most of the modern exponents of the perennial philosophy are hostile to the idea of modernity. (See Mark Sedgewick, Against the Modern World for a critical history and analysis.)
Quoting Wittgenstein
Man: 'It sure is hot down here.'
Second man: 'Yeah, but at least it's a dry heat'.
I would have thought that these kinds of transcendental 'truths' are the by product of other worldly beliefs, so this goes without saying, right?
No, you cannot fill a cup that's not empty. The verification of mystical knowledge has got nothing to do with philosophy as its beyond its reach.
Obviously, you will get people who only want to affirm what they have already conceived of the world
I would have thought that mystical knowledge is beyond human reach. Am I to take it you are a mystic in the Sufi tradition?
I have read the paragraph you quoted and l disagree with some of the points, the first and third point in particular
Mystical experience is available for everyone and the qualitative difference we find isn't due to the less capable nature of some people to find wisdom, it's due to their lack of commitment in finding the truth. Some people unfortunately have the blind of racism, nationalism, scientism, sectarianism, base desires etc over their eyes which prevents them from progressing in the spiritual path.
I agree with the second point, the fourth point is a bit ambiguous. A great exemplary life for me is in selflessly serving mankind without expecting any reward in return and keeping the heart attached to God. There should also be no conflict between the material needs of the body (+society) and the spiritual needs of the individuals
But that doesn't square with what you said immediately above:
Quoting Wittgenstein
Whence does 'other-worldly guidance' originate? Isnt that the meaning of 'revealed truth', that being the kind of insight which by implication is not spontaneously available to the untrained?
I'm a worthless abused dog..... l am very far from being a Sufi. I am unofficially affiliated with a Sufi tradition but l haven't really put any effort in it. However, l have read their books ( of the elites amongst them ) and l am slowly preparing myself mentally to take the path of Sufism. It's not an easy path as you have to remain in voluntary poverty and the world will turn its back on you and despise you. The world is full of despise for people like me already so that should not be difficult.
Again, there are definitely resonances with the ideal of 'self-realisation' as taught by Advaita Vedanta or 'realisation of the true nature' by Buddhists. The term 'realisation' is loaded or highly ramified, without a counterpart in secular discourse.
The revelation of the law (prophetic experience) is no longer available but the mystical experience is still available and it exists to convey esoteric meaning of the revealed text. Every person is capable of receiving mystical knowledge but it requires committment. You can have a spiritual master but he only acts as a medium and it's possible for God to increase your wisdom/knowledge without any intermediary
The highest aspiration of every Sufi is actually gazing at the sight of God . This world is a carcass for them, the paradise is a distraction. Self realization is only the beginning. You are supposed to die before death and annihilate yourself to the point God will bring you back to "life" with a new form/body/properties. Here's a famous hadith Ibn Arabi would always quote.
On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (?) said:
"Allah (mighty and sublime be He) said: Whosoever shows enmity to someone devoted to Me, I shall be at war with him. My servant draws not near to Me with anything more loved by Me than the religious duties I have enjoined upon him, and My servant continues to draw near to Me with supererogatory works so that I shall love him. When I love him I am his hearing with which he hears, his seeing with which he sees, his hand with which he strikes and his foot with which he walks. Were he to ask [something] of Me, I would surely give it to him, and were he to ask Me for refuge, I would surely grant him it. I do not hesitate about anything as much as I hesitate about [seizing] the soul of My faithful servant: he hates death and I hate hurting him."
It was related by al-Bukhari.
And a famous quote of Rabia Basri : "O my Lord, whatever share of this world You have bestowed on me, bestow it to my enemies, and whatever share of the next world You have for me, give it to my friends. You are enough for me."
Best not to argue, then. :worry:
To argue means being at war...
Diogenes
[quote=Wikipedia]Diogenes made a virtue of poverty. He begged for a living and often slept in a large ceramic jar, or pithos, in the marketplace.[5] He became notorious for his philosophical stunts, such as carrying a lamp during the day, claiming to be looking for a man (often rendered in English as "looking for an honest man").[/quote]
But only if you were serious.
Diogenes was a real example of a "hermit" and not those fake religious fans who only act for businesses and private concerns
Correctamundo!
A piece of advice a monk gave me: Fake it till ya make it!
A piece of advice a monk gave me: if you get caught sleeping at work, slowly raise your hand and say, 'In the name of Jesus, Amen."
Okay, l get it. You have a hate boner for religion.
You are a fan of Yukio Mishima, a right wing fascist who killed himself when he came to the realization that Japan has moved on ( quite sensibly ) from the 1930/40 s war mongering imperialist genocidal agenda. I would be wary of anyone who wants to see the return of WW2 Japan. Go read about the nanking massacre. You are disappointed with modernism but your ( Yukio's) cure ie nationalism + militarism is significantly worse than the disease itself.
And yet, you have the guts to criticize Sufis who transcend the boundaries of race, culture, the Weltanschauung of the era itself but l can't stop you. It's a free world.
If you really think our lord and leader Yukio Mishima is a "fascist", you misunderstood everything. Give it a try and read more about him. He would change your thoughts and life. Believe me.
Quoting Wittgenstein
I am disappointed and I hate all related to modernism. We are the worst generation ever. But it looks like doesn't matter at all because the people are not aware of it and it turns out I am the mad man here... but you know? I no longer want to be angry. If they want to be happy in their blindness is ok for me. I don't know how to help them.
I will let you decide who is more devoted to God
This forum doesn't seem the appropriate place to talk of Sufism, l can almost feel the discomfort of people through the screen. I need to find my own people, but so far l can only travel back in time and pretend to converse with Sufis, with the help of the books they have left behind. It's a cliche to wish you were born a few generations back but my case goes back hundreds of years
Indeed it is not. As one of the forum anti-materialists I often rub people up the wrong way with ideas drawn from the perennial philosophical traditions. But I try and express my arguments more in line with the dissident strands of current philosophical discourse, rather than appeal directly to religious lore, which never goes down well here. However I encourage you by all means to pursue your interest in Sufism. You might find Llewelyn Vaughan Lee interesting (I was also going to mention Henry Bayman although his website appears to be offline.) But there are many resources attached to Vaughan Lee's page. I've seen him present - he's a charismatic speaker and accomplished author.
By all means, seek out others whose interests converge with your own, but it is pointless to try and convey the kinds of teachings you're interested in to the kind of general audience you'll find here, they won't have ears to hear it.
It does, if you want to see the wonder of creation. The simple and at the same time most complex idea that the material universe, endowed with heavenly magic, is a temporary but eternally repeating reflection of an eternal, non-material heaven filled with eternal life, is enough to let the wonder, getting rid off by science, return.
Quoting javi2541997
On the contrary! We're the best, and, although on the brink of annihilation, there is hope for the new times arriving before too not too long.
Oh, Hillary, I am jealous of your positiveness